CVE-2025-26620: Duende.AccessTokenManagement race condition when concurrently retrieving customized Client Credentials Access Tokens
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 25/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.39% (FIRST EPSS).
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- According to CISA the attack is automatable: targets can be found by mass scanning.
- Fixed version: Duende.AccessTokenManagement (NuGet) 3.2.0.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to Duende.AccessTokenManagement (NuGet) 3.2.0 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
Duende.AccessTokenManagement is a set of .NET libraries that manage OAuth and OpenId Connect access tokens. Duende.AccessTokenManagement contains a race condition when requesting access tokens using the client credentials flow. Concurrent requests to obtain an access token using differing protocol parameters can return access tokens obtained with the wrong scope, resource indicator, or other protocol parameters. Such usage is somewhat atypical, and only a small percentage of users are likely to be affected. Duende.AccessTokenManagement can request access tokens using the client credentials flow in several ways. In basic usage, the client credentials flow is configured once and the parameters do not vary. In more advanced situations, requests with varying protocol parameters may be made by calling specific overloads of these methods: `HttpContext.GetClientAccessTokenAsync()` and `IClientCredentialsTokenManagementService.GetAccessTokenAsync()`. There are overloads of both of these methods that accept a `TokenRequestParameters` object that customizes token request parameters. However, concurrent requests with varying `TokenRequestParameters` will result in the same token for all concurrent calls. Most users can simply update the NuGet package to the latest version. Customizations of the `IClientCredentialsTokenCache` that derive from the default implementation (`DistributedClientCredentialsTokenCache`) will require a small code change, as its constructor was changed to add a dependency on the `ITokenRequestSynchronization` service. The synchronization service will need to be injected into the derived class and passed to the base constructor. The impact of this vulnerability depends on how Duende.AccessTokenManagement is used and on the security architecture of the solution. Most users will not be vulnerable to this issue. More advanced users may run into this issue by calling the methods specified above with customized token request parameters. The impact of obtaining an access token with different than intended protocol parameters will vary depending on application logic, security architecture, and the authorization policy of the resource servers.
- Published
- Feb 18, 2025
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.3% · 33th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-367
Report tools
Action score
25
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 25 / 40 · 6.3 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.3%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- yes
- Technical impact
- partial
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- —
- CNA · GitHub_M
- 6.3
- NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Is your version affected? Check itNoroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
—
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (GitHub_M). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
DuendeSoftware foss
- < 3.2.0affected
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| NuGet | Duende.AccessTokenManagement | before 3.2.0 | 3.2.0 |
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| NuGet:Duende.AccessTokenManagement | 3.2.0 | Package registry (OSV) |
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
No history yet (it accumulates with the daily EPSS job).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- No account or password is required.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- Integrity
- Availability
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- X
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-367 · Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) Race ConditionCVSS vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
nvd-secondary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (1 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.